NC-083 - Harassment

The Appellant filed a harassment complaint against his Detachment Commander (Alleged Harasser). The Respondent concluded that the elements of harassment were not met because the Alleged Harasser's conduct was not improper to the point where she should have reasonably known that it would cause offence to the Appellant.

The Appellant presented an appeal 68 days after the expiration of the 14-day time limit set forth in section 38 of the Commissioner's Standing Orders (Grievances and Appeals) (CSO (Grievances and Appeals)). Upon request, he explained that his appeal was late because:

The Respondent chose not to make submissions because he did not know what specific information was provided to the Appellant regarding his right to appeal.

ERC Findings

The ERC found that the appeal was untimely. Pursuant to section 38 of the CSO (Grievances and Appeals), the Appellant was required to file his appeal within 14 days after the date upon which he was served with the Decision. He did not do so, and there were no exceptional circumstances warranting an extension of time pursuant to subsection 43(d) of the CSO (Grievances and Appeals). The Appellant was initially advised that he could not appeal because he was retired. However, the Appellant took a month to submit an appeal even after he was informed that he could proceed with the appeal and had noted that he had 14 days to do so. The Appellant did not provide evidence to demonstrate that his state of health affected his ability to file a Statement of Appeal. Since the relevant time limit was described in publicly available regulations, the Appellant's alleged limited access to resources could not explain the delay. Furthermore, the Appellant did not demonstrate that the existing appeals regime unfairly interfered with his ability to pursue the appeal.

ERC Recommendation

The ERC recommended that this appeal be dismissed on the basis that it was initiated after the expiry of the statutory time limit, and an extension of that time limit is not warranted in the circumstances.

Commissioner of the RCMP Decision dated January 17, 2022

The Commissioner’s decision, as summarized by her office, is as follows:

The Appellant appeals the Respondent’s decision whereby he found that the allegations of harassment, made by the Appellant against his Detachment Commander (Alleged Harasser), were not established

Upon receiving the appeal, the RCMP Office for the Coordination of Grievances and Appeals (OCGA) noted that the Appellant submitted his appeal outside of the statutory 14-day time limit. The Appellant provided submissions in support of his request to have the time limitation retroactively extended. The appeal was forwarded to the RCMP External Review Committee (ERC) for review. In a report containing findings and recommendations, issued on November 3, 2021, (NC-2017-009 (NC-083)), the Chair of the ERC, Mr. Charles Randall Smith, recommended that the appeal be dismissed on the basis that it was submitted after the expiration of the statutory time limit, and that an extension of the time limit is not warranted in the circumstances.

Having considered the facts of the matter, the applicable statutory provisions and the relevant jurisprudence, the adjudicator concurred with the findings of the ERC and determined that the appeal was filed after the expiration of the statutory time limit and that a retroactive extension of the time limit was not justified in this instance. The adjudicator dismissed the appeal.

Page details

Date modified: